Genocide negotiations ‘waste of time’ Previous agreement rules out reparations CATHERINE SASMANThe Namibian and German governments are asked to say whether an agreement reached shortly after independence means that reparation claims are null and void.
The bilateral negotiations between the Namibian and German governments on the 1904-1908 genocide are a “public display of dishonesty” because of an agreement struck between the two governments at independence.
This was the stark pronouncement on the negotiations by Festus Muundjua, member of the Ovaherero Traditional Authority (OTA) at the non-governmental congress on restorative justice after genocide in Berlin in mid-October.
Muundjua based his conclusion on a publication titled ‘The prospects of success for the Herero lawsuit against the Deutsche Bank for crimes committed during German colonial times’, written by researcher Jan Grofe.
This study was sponsored by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Namibian Institute for Democracy (NID).
Grofe wrote that by 1990 the two states had already agreed to establish a special relationship due to their historic ties, which for the German government meant more development aid to Namibia than any other country.
The Namibian government agreed that continuing German development aid, together with the German Democratic Republic’s support for Swapo during the struggle for independence from South Africa, made reparations null and void, wrote Grofe.
Muundjua now questions whether that agreement means that the development aid to Namibia, and whatever support was given to Swapo, had made reparation payments null and void.
“The German ambassador [Christian Schlage] in Namibia has already said that there will be no reparations and that the admission of genocide has no legal consequences. Are these statements not said within the context of this betrayal agreement?” Muundjua asked.
He argues that an apology, which would admit the crime of genocide and concomitant damage it caused, defeats logic if the German government refuses to pay reparations to affected Ovaherero and Nama communities.
“It amounts to a criminal telling the judge that he pleads guilty but for punishment he will only offer what he dictates.”
Muundjua also said the two governments must express themselves on the bilateral agreement as pointed out by Grofe and explain what consequences it has for current genocide negotiations and particularly the matter of reparations claimed by the Ovaherero and Nama.
Muundjua said Namibia’s special envoy in the genocide negotiations, Dr Zed Ngavirue, should be in a position to shed light on the agreement since he was the director general of the National Planning Commission (NPC), which was signing development aid agreements on behalf of the Namibian government directly after independence.
“I cannot believe that those who say no reparation payment and no legal consequences are not aware of this agreement. They should admit that there was and is such an agreement and also the circumstances under which it was agreed to put it into an agreement,” said Muundjua.
Otherwise, he added, the current genocide negotiations are a waste of time because the outcome would already be known.